Yamaha NU1X "loud note" fix seems to cause another problem

I'm finally at my computer and can elaborate more.

It was me who first proposed a workaround to the loud note problem on the PW forum:

Since the issue happens when the key has not been released fully but just below the top position, the sensing logic assumes it has been released fully and will be ready to detect a repeated strike. However mechanically the jack has not been reengaged under the butt and the key is then very easy to be pushed with a high velocity (no weight to throw under your finger) and so the sensing logic is fooled into thinking this is a regular strike with a high velocity. So, my suggestion here is that this can happen in different situations. Of course one of them is to do it deliberately as I have demonstrated:

However it can also naturally happen in quick repetition, such as e.g. single key repetitions or trills when the key hasn't returned fully and you're pressing it again. And so for this particular case my proposal is for the sensing logic to detect the time between two or more activations of the same key (even if there is another note in between) and if one of the repeated strikes has a velocity higher than say 125 while the duration is shorter than a threshold (hence the repetition is quick), then assume this is the "loud note issue" happening, so then take the velocity from the first strike (or average it for multiple such strikes) and apply it to the "offending" one. This can work in many situations but unfortunately may affect genuinely loud strikes...

Anyway, a member on PW implemented my proposal (I forgot his name, wasn't that actually @xooorx ?) and published it on GitHub by just using a script interpreting the MIDI data, similar to @vagfilm MIDI filter. He said it was working OK for him and soon he was contacted by Yamaha and they provided him with a beta firmware that implemented the same logic for him to try. Later on they made it official and also created one for NU1 (but it's not published, people should ask Yamaha for it).

As has been discussed so many times, there's no easy solution to this problem if using only key sensors. I believe the only simple and good solution for Yamaha would be to add mechanical repetition springs as in https://pianoclack.com/forum/d/171-feurich-high-speed-kamm-upright-action

This way the key will repeat as a grand piano and the mechanical jamming won't occur in the first place.

porco_rosso (quoted) The cause of the problem was probably due to the fact that the NU1X only uses one key movement sensor, which does not work as precisely as three-sensor systems.

It is not pertinent to compare hybrid numbers of sensors with usual digital piano action. Alpha pianos has only 2 sensors (hammer pressure, damper), the N1X only 2 sensors (key position, hammer strike).

The issue is that there is nothing on a NU1X to measure if the escapement action has been rearmed and if we can play a sound.

The fact that 3 sensors on usual digital piano is enough deals with the absence of escapement.

Frédéric L The cause of the problem was probably due to the fact that the NU1X only uses one key movement sensor, which does not work as precisely as three-sensor systems.

This is not correct. Even if it is only one sensor, it is an optical sensor that is able to continuoulsy measure distances, and is used to calculate velocities between multiple distance points (how many, I am sure that Yamaha did not disclose). So, it should be, at least, as precise as a 3 sensor (if it calculates 3 distances) and has the potential to be much more precise if it calculates from more than 3 distances. And, if I remember correctly, Yamaha may use angular readings of the key rather than distances... but it boils down to the same principle. So, it is definitely not a "one sensor" system.

CyberGene the sensing logic assumes it has been released fully and will be ready to detect a repeated strike

But eddiepiano stated that he could create a muffled note by a single ff stroke, without repetition. So, if this is reproducible, it is note a jack issue. My bet is that at some fffff strikes, the Yamaha logic calculates very high velocities, and as a safety measure assumes that to be a "loud note issue" and puts the note at m... (you can hear Yamaha engineer say: "no, no, no... no pianist can play this hard... if it is this high speed it should be a misreading due to repetition, and in that case make it a midi 70 and he should be happy").

But my point is that the number of sensors is not the key factor. NU1X has 1 analog sensor which count for 3 (1 for the damper, 2 for the velocity), and the Alpha has a damper sensor (1?) and a hammer pressure which could count for 2 since it is analog and measure the velocity.

No the key point is the measure of hammer movement which should verify the hammer has been moved. A configuration : 1 key sensor (damper) and 2 hammer sensors (hammer, velocity) could be more pertinent than 3 sensors at the keys like the shaded gray flag of the NU1X can emulate.

Sorry Frédéric: I quoted eddie from your post and somehow the quote was atributed to you.

vagfilm But eddiepiano stated that he could create a muffled note by a single ff stroke, without repetition. So, if this is reproducible, it is note a jack issue.

Hmm, if Eddie really meant that a single fff note would be muffled without a recent prior strike for the same note, then something is very wrong with the Yamaha algorithms.

I had other problem with my NU1X which was ultimately the reason to return it: two of the keys in the middle consistently produced slightly higher velocities than the surrounding keys, which could be confirmed by pressing the keys together with an object and observing the MIDI velocities. I reported that to Yamaha and they sent me instructions on how to activate the key calibration procedure but it didn't help. Unfortunately the NU1X has its quirks. Luckily my N1X is perfect in that regard.

What puzzle me is that the N3 service manual (sorry it is the only Aventgrand Service Manual I have), has no procedure for calibration, only a « test » which verify if each threshold is at the good height. But if the test fails, we are out of luck.

Note : there are 4 thresholds…

Hey, thank you all for the answers and the clarification regarding the sensor systems!

CyberGene Hmm, if Eddie really meant that a single fff note would be muffled without a recent prior strike for the same note, then something is very wrong with the Yamaha algorithms.

Yes, I mean it like this. A f/ff/fff strike on a note can send the right MIDi value and sound like it's supposed to, but a f/ff/ff strike on the same note can also only send a MIDI value of 70ish and sound muffled. It can happen on any key and it can happen with or without repetition. But this disbalance between input and output only happens when striking the key hard in the f+ range, thats why I think the software/algorithm that "fixed" the loud note bug detects a supposedly "loud note" (false alarm) and softens it. It does not happen the other way around (making a softer input louder as as it is) nor are they any other irregularities with die MIDI output when playing vom ppp - mf, it's very precise. And it's also very precise in the f+ range when the algorithm isn't involved.

Today I practiced on my good old Roland FP-30 (+ Pianoteq) and it was a good feeling to get reliable sounds also in the high dynamic range… But I missed the real action and especially the escapement.

Eddiepiano,: So you saved $5grand? 😆 Or will you get something else?

porco_rosso Do you have, or can you make a small video of this behaviour? Thanks

I just tried this on my NU1, with firmware update, on several keys, and could not discern a problem. Maybe I did not correctly recreate the conditions you describe.

@spanishbuddha

I suspect a lot depends on the ability and capabilities of the player. For example, I have the NU1 firmware update (I believe you gave it to me), but decided to not install it after discussing the issue with my piano teacher: initially I occasionally experienced the "loud note" issue, but then my teacher explained that my technique was incorrect (I had just started with him). After some time in which I am doing lots of things with him (including technique), I am never experiencing the problem anymore in regular playing. I know the problem is still there because I can trigger it at will if I decide to do so, but I simply don't play "that way" anymore (despite my main instrument now being a grand piano).

Now, as @CyberGene explained, problem is purely hardware and the fix is not a fix, but a purely software workaround (I am pretty sure there is no AI involved, just time measurements, but that's irrelevant). I suspect @porco_rosso has a great technique, since repeating very fast multiple notes @ fff level is not commonly done, and I suspect Yamaha did not get this workaround tested at that level (or if they did, they thought it was a virtuoso thing unlikely to be in the target audience).

Regarding:

porco_rosso I can't believe it, how can Yamaha still produce and sell these pianos with this systematic error due to their non-sufficient one sensor system? And I can't believe how nobody has noticed this until now? It's less noticeable than a sudden out of place loud note of course, so for Yamaha this may seem to be a better "solution" than the loud note issue.

I think this behavior is more closely related to how the upright action works: if you don't fully release the key, you may easily get a very quiet or even silent second/third note. So incorrectly played fast repetitions on the NU1(x) and on an upright are now behaving identically. Of course if you are virtuoso as I am speculating, you know that very well and perhaps you are fully releasing the keys, but if you aren't/don't give it a try on a number of upright pianos and see how they behave.

That said, Yamaha could have done better. Changing the sensors would have required quite a change of the instrument, so while I agree with your sentiment, I can't really blame them from not doing. Digital pianos have all sort of issues that you can never expect a perfect one. But, Yamaha could have made lemonade out of the lemons, by making a settings for this "fix" to be implemented as different "modes". I proposed "practice" as the name for the fix "off", so you'd notice your poor technique with a loud note, and a "performance" name for the fix "on". Not sure if @porco_rosso would have tolerated the loud note issue (like I do), but at least he could have had another choice rather than simply returning the instrument.

As for cheaper alternatives, if you have time/stamina, you could engage in the Build your own hybrid piano which is the natural next step of the Cybrid.

TomLC Eddiepiano,: So you saved $5grand? 😆 Or will you get something else?

No, I think I have to spend more, as I'd really like to have a real acoustic action under my fingers. The real escapement makes playing much more comfortable and authentic for me. Also, although PHA-50 and GF3 are pretty nice and have longer pivots, there are in my opinion not that much better than the PHA-4 in the FP-30 (in combination with Pianoteq), I can't justify spending 2000 - 4000 € for this felt sidestep. The real next step up is an acoustic action. Sadly, there is no alternative to the NV5S/10S or N1X now. I would love to have a VPC1 like MIDI Controller in a minimalistic cabinet with a grand action, but to a more affordable price than NV10S or N1X.

spanishbuddha eddiepiano Do you have, or can you make a small video of this behaviour? Thanks

Yes, I will try to capture it. To make it as clear as possible I will try to film my fingers hitting the keys as well capture the screen and tone of Pianoteq so that one can see the MIDI values and tone and cut everything together.

RIP I am certainly not a experienced virtuoso player - although my teacher stated that I could have developed to a concert pianist if I had started as a child. 😄 I play (early) intermediate pieces at best at this moment. As good and technically clean as possible, but still. But to notice this problem I don't have to be a virtuoso, as this problem does not only occur when playing fast repeated notes but also when hitting a new note that has not already been played. As I written earlier:

porco_rosso Yes, I mean it like this. A f/ff/fff strike on a note can send the right MIDi value and sound like it's supposed to, but a f/ff/ff strike on the same note can also only send a MIDI value of 70ish and sound muffled. It can happen on any key and it can happen with or without repetition. But this disbalance between input and output only happens when striking the key hard in the f+ range, thats why I think the software/algorithm that "fixed" the loud note bug detects a supposedly "loud note" (false alarm) and softens it. It does not happen the other way around (making a softer input louder as as it is) nor are they any other irregularities with die MIDI output when playing vom ppp - mf, it's very precise. And it's also very precise in the f+ range when the algorithm isn't involved.

So it can occur randomly on any note that is played f/ff.

RIP But, Yamaha could have made lemonade out of the lemons, by making a settings for this "fix" to be implemented as different "modes". I proposed "practice" as the name for the fix "off", so you'd notice your poor technique with a loud note, and a "performance" name for the fix "on". Not sure if @eddiepiano would have tolerated the loud note issue (like I do), but at least he could have had another choice rather than simply returning the instrument.

I think I would have tolerated the loud note issue, because I have no trouble playing acoustic uprights and let the key release fully before hitting again.

RIP As for cheaper alternatives, if you have time/stamina, you could engage in the Build your own hybrid piano which is the natural next step of the Cybrid.

I am fascinated by your projects and have read the Cybrid thread, but unfortunately I don't have the technical or workmanship skills to realize a similar project.

Seems like the Yamaha fix might be too dumb and not the same as what I proposed 🙂 As @vagfilm suggested, probably they just detect high-velocity strikes and compare them to the previous note or something like that and lower the velocity. If that's the case, well, this is stupid. I hope that's not the case but it isn't impossible for Yamaha to decide that they prefer people to stop reporting the loud-note issue and instead replace it with another stupid issue that is less noticeable by the majority of people... As much as I love Yamaha, I also hate their stubbornness 🤦🏻‍♂️

P.S. If you still like the NU1X for its sound and feel but can stretch to the N1X, I believe it's just the perfect instrument where you won't have any complaints. The NV5 is slightly cheaper and I believe it has a very good upright action which won't suffer from loud note "issues". I personally am rather cold about the Kawai samples though.

CyberGene P.S. If you still like the NU1X for its sound and feel but can stretch to the N1X, I believe it's just the perfect instrument where you won't have any complaints. The NV5 is slightly cheaper and I believe it has a very good upright action which won't suffer from loud note "issues". I personally am rather cold about the Kawai samples though.

I played all hybrids several times, but mostly with headphones. JustMusic in Berlin had them all in their exhibition. Right now (I assume due to the supply problems) there is only the NU1X left.

I liked the action of the NV-10 most. It's feels exactly like many grands I played, but excellently regulated. I love that they implemented the real damper mechanism. The N1X was great too, but stiffer and harder (not necessarily heavier), so based on action alone, I would prefer the NV-10(S) over the N1X.

Regarding the NV-5 and NU1X I felt the same. I preferred the action of the NV-5 over the NU1X. The NV-5 actions felt like a more "grown" upright action with longer keysticks / pivot which made it more precise and even across the deepness of the key, regardless of playing far or near the fallboard. The NU1X felt a shorter, and again a bit shallower and stiffer. But it was good enough for me.

So action wise: NV-10 > N1X > NV-5 > NU1X

The sound system of the hybrid grands was disappointing. The NV-10 sounds boxy and the base is too strong. The N1X sounds a bit better, but not clear enough and I feel like the overall quality and resolution of the speakers is quite low.

The NV-5 was the best sounding digital piano I've ever played and closest to the experience of an acoustic piano. But the NU1X sounds really great too - both much better than their grand hybrids counterparts.

Sound system: NV-5 > NU1X > N1X > NV-10

And aesthetics: NV-5 > NU1X > NV-10 > N1X

Like you I like the CFX samples better than the SK-EX Samples. But both doesn't sound as good and organic as Pianoteq for me. As I play mostly with Pianoteq (and would use better sounding sample libraries like VSL if my computer was up to the task) this is not a deciding factor.

I also realized in the two weeks with the NU1X that even with the good sound system I practice and play most of the time with headphones because I don't want to disturb my neighbors. To play a piece for my friends and family the weaker sound systems of the grand hybrids are also good enough.

The reason why I initially decided for the NU1X were very practical. It was the most affordable hybrid with a real, good enough action, good samples and a great sound system. A Big Bonus was the integrated audio interface. I can play Pianoteq through the integrated speakers with only a single USB cable and it's a great experience, it sounds wonderful. The N1X can do this too. But as stated I play most of the time with headphones anyway. So the deciding factor for the next purchase should be the action, and I like the NV-10 actions the most. There is one problem: It's double the price of the NU1X…

Yes, seems like the NV10 has the edge with its action but some people don’t like the speaker system, @oshogg being one of its critics.

It’s a pity that Yamaha did nothing to fix the NU1X which is a great and affordable instrument that is let down by the loud note issue. If that’s not a good enough reason for them to start putting inexpensive double-repetition springs to their action, I don’t know what is.

porco_rosso although PHA-50 and GF3 are pretty nice and have longer pivots, there are in my opinion not that much better than the PHA-4 in the FP-30

Have you played the Roland LX706 and the Casio GP310?

They both have better actions than the PHA-50.

Yes. I like the Roland Hybrid Action on LX706 and LX708, it has a remarkably longer pivot than PHA-50, but it's too light for my taste. I don't like their modeling or speaker system. And they are ugly af. They could collaborate with Pianoteq in the future for a better modeling engine…

The Casio GP Action is great. It's smooth and fast, the MIDI response is very accurate. I really like that they don't have that rubbery nonsense fake escapement simulation. But I don't like the samples and the speaker system is mediocre too. Also I really don't want to spend so much money on a Casio DP. The resale value on the private secondhand is incredibly low compared to Yamaha and Kawai. I even ordered a GP510 before the NU1X but cancelled the order again.

Although both actions (and PHA-50 and GF3) are better than the PHA-4 of my FP-30, they still feel like a (very good) digital action with "attached" hammers and no real escapement. The requested 3000€ - 4000 € feel too much for me for that.

porco_rosso I really don't want to spend so much money on a Casio DP.

Yes I have no idea why they increased the price by 25% with the GP-310. The previous model GP-300 was only about USD $2,500 + tax. The only hardware change they made was the speakers, and as you say: they're still mediocre.

porco_rosso I like the Roland Hybrid Action on LX706 and LX708, it has a remarkably longer pivot than PHA-50, but it's too light for my taste. I don't like their modeling or speaker system. And they are ugly af. They could collaborate with Pianoteq in the future for a better modeling engine…

Well the good news is they're due to replace these models by about January. So if you can hold it until then perhaps Roland will bring out something spellbinding.

I'm in a similar boat - all the current models have cons.

LX706: no USB Audio, ugly cabinet, boxy sound system, dated user interface with 30 year old LCD technology

CA99 / NV5S: no USB Audio, flawed user interface with 20 year old LCD screen technology

N1X: old samples, dated user interface with 40 year old button technology

Hopefully both Yamaha and Roland lift their game next year. My budget is currently USD $10,000, but I'm not handing it over for something mediocre.